December 24, 2013

Like the “Duck Dynasty” dispute, or the recent fight over renaming a Florida school honoring a founder of the KKK, the Wisconsin fight raises the question of among some people as to whether there is a blanket protection of speech, even when it is hateful to some people....

The Wisconsin law, signed by Walker, amends a 2010 state law that required Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction to hold a hearing on a school's race-based nickname if the agency received a single complaint. The 2010 law placed the burden on the school district of proving the nickname wasn't discriminatory.

22 comments:

Has the press grown so ideologically turgid that don't even want to think about what problems the Heckler's Veto presents not just to our 1st Amendment Rights, but to their own livelihoods?

If folks get their way by claiming that their precious & sensitive little feelings have been all hurt, then everyone starts doing it. Free thought just shuts down, because almost anything that's worth saying is going to piss off somebody.

Since the name "Wisconsin" is the Americanization of the historic French language interpretation of the Indian name for the largest river in the state, Wisconsinites need to first consider renaming the state "Meskousing" before beating up the 30 schools in the state that use "offensive" names like "Indians" and "Chieftains."

Non-Indians have no say about the overarching laws that govern the seven Indian (oops Native American) reservations in the state - so why do the reservation dwellers have sole rights to determine what is and what is not offensive use of English language words?

Mascot names correspond to team pride and spirit - not to team denigration. So where can there possibly be a civil rights violation? Personally, I think that the historic and continued treatment of American Indians as sub-humans under our laws needs to stop - but mascot names are not even symptoms of that problem.

When I saw the words LA Times columnist, I immediately thought about that useless idiot. Michael Hiltzik. The subject of this column is about his speed. But apparently two villages have lost their idiots.

I frankly don't see much of a problem with the law--at least as I understand it. If someone comes to a school superintendent saying that they've got their knickers in a knot and are "offended" about this or that, a single individual's complaint will not require action. The complainant will have to show that some significant number of others are similarly offended before action is required.

What's wrong with that? We used to get up petitions to address authority with our grievances. Now some believe that a lone heckler has the right to mandate change for all.

Now it may well be that some wise single visionary can see the correct path for all to follow. But in my experience such individuals are damned thin on the ground.

To the left truth is irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether there is any connection between Phil Robertson and Scott Walker. The left depends on smears and lies to achieve power over other people and to reprogram them into their way of group think.

YoungHegelian: "Has the press grown so ideologically turgid that don't even want to think about what problems the Heckler's Veto presents not just to our 1st Amendment Rights, but to their own livelihoods?"

These are leftists.

They are happy to offer up their livelihoods in service to the state.

This is sort of a "duh" moment and, since leftists don't actually believe a single thing they lecture the rest of us about, also requires a "Fen's Law" callout.

Robertson and Scott are both white men from the Scots-Irish culture {a/k/a Amuricans} and as such accept whatever race, color and nationality is willing to adopt the rules of Scot-Irish community IS FULLY ACCEPTED.

They are charged with not knowing about bigotry, and they don't because they don't practice it.

What is wrong with naming a school after Nathan Bedford Forrest? He was a good Democrat and that should over rule any other consideration. Besides, Democrat Robert Byrd, who was the longest-serving U.S. Senator and filibustered against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, was a member of the KKK.

"Most Democrats from the Southern states opposed the bill and led an unsuccessful 83-day filibuster, including Senators Albert Gore, Sr. (D-TN) and J. William Fulbright (D-AR), as well as Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who personally filibustered for 14 hours straight."